Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Beyond limits: Lecturers’ reflections on Moodle uptake in South African universities

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The mandatory phasing in of the Moodle learning environment within South African universities has met with a variety of uptake challenges. Specifically, Moodle was officially introduced without clear exposition of the underpinning theory, training, and implementation framework for its adoption. This study reports on a qualitative case study drawing from a purposive sampling of two South African universities that have adopted Moodle to support the teaching and learning endeavour. 31 lecturers who have used Moodle within their lectures were selected, drawing their responses and data through reflective activity, Moodle group discussion and one-on-one semi-structured interviews. The analysis was guided by inductive and deductive reasoning, and the study was framed by non-formal, formal, and informal e-learning frameworks. The study revealed that the top-down imposition of mandatory Moodle implementation was resisted by lecturers, hindering uptake, and maximum potential was difficult to measure. In the absence of clear policy directives, the study recommends that the lecturers go beyond the limits and develop their own means of formal, informal and non-formal reflections to gauge the merits or limitations of Moodle. The reflections were harnessed to coin the Equilateral Moodle Reflections framework in order to maximise the potential uptake and use of Moodle in higher education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amory, A. (2010). Education technology and hidden ideological contradictions. Educational Technology & Society, 13(1), 69–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anthony, B., Kamaludin, A., Romli, A., Raffei, A., Nincarean, D., Abdullah, A., et al. (2019). Exploring the role of blended learning for teaching and learning effectiveness in institutions of higher learning: An empirical investigation. Education and Information Technologies, 24(6), 3433–3466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09941-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bates, A. (2018). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning for a digital age. London: Tony Bates Associates Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates, A., & Poole, G. (2003). Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education: Foundations for Success: ERIC.

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability (formerly: Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education), 21(1), 5–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (2013). Promoting reflection in learning A modeli. Boundaries of Adult Learning, 1, 32–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandl, K. (2005). Are you ready to “Moodle LMS”. Language Learning & Technology, 9(2), 16–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burkle, M., & Cobo, C. (2018). Redefining knowledge in the digital age. Journal New Aproaches in Education, 7(2), 79–80.

  • Cavus, N., & Zabadi, T. (2014). A comparison of open source learning management systems. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 143(1), 521–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chavan, A., & Pavri, S. (2004). Open-source learning management with Moodle LMS. Linux Journal, 2004(128), 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christopher, P. (2019). The 20 Best Learning Management Systems (2019 Update). Retrieved from https://elearningindustry.com/the-20-best-learning-management-systems

  • Chugh, R., Ledger, S., & Shields, R. (2017). Curriculum design for distance education in the tertiary sector. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), 4–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning: John Wiley & Sons.

  • Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2013). Research methods in education. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Costello, E., Brown, M., Mhichíl, M. N. G., & Zhang, J. (2018). Big course small talk: Twitter and MOOCs—A systematic review of research designs 2011–2017. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. (2014). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). California: SAGE Publications, Inc..

  • Creswell, J., & Poth, C. N. (2017). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. California: SAGE Publications, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, B., Carmean, C., & Wagner, E. D. (2009). The evolution of the LMS: From management to learning. Santa Rosa: e-Learning Guild.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the reflective thinking to the educative process. New York: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duart, J. M., & Szűcs, A. (2018). Towards personalized guidance and support for learning. Paper presented at the 10th EDEN Research Workshop Barcelona, Spain.

  • Elabnody, M. R. (2015). A survey of top 10 open source learning management systems. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 4(8), 7–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finogeev, A., Gamidullaeva, L., Bershadsky, A., Fionova, L., Deev, M., & Finogeev, A. (2020). Convergent approach to synthesis of the information learning environment for higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 25(1), 11–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09903-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fomunyam, K. (2014). Curriculum theorizing and individualism: An exploration of the curriculum’s relation to the social, personal and political dimensions of schooling. Mevlana International Journal of Education (MIJE), 4(2), 122–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fomunyam, K., & Teferra, D. (2017). Curriculum responsiveness within the context of decolonisation in south African higher education. Perspectives in Education, 35(2), 196–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Govender, N., & Khoza, S. (2017). Technology in Education for Teachers. In L. Ramrathan, L. Le Grange, & P. Higgs (Eds.), Education Studies for Initial Teacher Development. Cape Town: Juta & Company (PTY) Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gumbo, M. (2019). Online or offline supervision? Postgraduate supervisors state their position at University of South Africa. South African Journal of Higher Education, 33. https://doi.org/10.20853/33-1-2673.

  • Hoadley, U., & Jansen, J. (2014). Curriculum: Organizing knowledge for the classroom. Cape Town: Oxford University Press Southern Africa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollowell, J. (2011). Moodle LMS as a Curriculum and Information Management System: Packt Publishing Ltd.

  • Jamil, M. G., & Isiaq, S. O. (2019). Teaching technology with technology: Approaches to bridging learning and teaching gaps in simulation-based programming education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kashora, T., van der Poll, H. M., & van der Poll, J. A. (2016). E-learning and technologies for open distance learning in management accounting. Africa Education Review, 13(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/18146627.2016.1186863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khoza, S. (2012). Who helps an online facilitator to learn with students in a day. Mevlana International Journal of Education, 2(2), 75–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khoza, S. (2016). Is teaching without understanding curriculum visions and goals a high risk? SAJHE, 30(5), 104–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khoza, S. (2017). Is this Moodle for personal, societal and/or professional space/s when students reflect? Paper presented at the Paper presented at the 12th International Conference on E-Learning (ICEL), The Central University of Florida, Orlando, USA.

  • Khoza, S. (2019). Lecturers' reflections on curricular spider web concepts transformation strategies. Transformation of Higher Education Institutions in Post-Apartheid South Africa, 1(2019), 15–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khoza, S., & Mpungose, C. (2018). Lecturers’ needs of the Moodle LMS Curriculum at a South African University paper presented at the 13th international conference on E-learning (ICEL), Cape Peninsula University of Technology.

  • McHaney, R. (2012). The new digital shoreline: How Web 2.0 and millennials are revolutionizing higher education: Stylus publishing, LLC.

  • McNiff, J. (2013). Action research: Principles and practices (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadyari, S., & Singh, H. (2015). Understanding the effect of e-learning on individual performance: The role of digital literacy. Computers & Education, 82, 11–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, K. R. (2004). The poverty of curriculum theory: A critique of Wraga and Hlebowitsh. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(4), 487–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mpungose, C. (2018). Exploring Lecturers’ Reflections on the Use of Moodle LMS to Teach Physical Science Modules at a South African university. (PhD. ), UKZN, Durban (214581960).

  • Mpungose, C. (2019a). Is Moodle LMS a Platform to Decolonise the University Curriculum? Lecturers’ Reflections. Africa Education Review, 1–16.

  • Mpungose, C. (2019b). Is Moodle LMS or WhatsApp the preferred e-learning platform at a south African university? First-year students’ experiences. Education and Information Technologies, 25(2), 927–941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Padayachee, P., Wagner-Welsh, S., & Johannes, H. (2018). Online assessment in Moodle LMS: A framework for supporting our students. South African Journal of Higher Education, 32(5), 211–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pankaja, N. (2015). A comparative study of popular online platforms for E learning solutions. (PhD thesis), Univ. of Mysore, Educational Center. Retrieved from https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/handle/10603/146883

  • Pinar, W. (2012). What is curriculum theory? New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Postma, L. (2019). Analysing a discussion on an online university forum: A communicative approach to discursive democracy. South African Journal of Higher Education, 33(2), 163–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramrathan, L. (2017). Educational Research: Key concepts. In L. Ramrathan, L. Le Grange, & P. Higgs (Eds.), Education Studies: for Initial Teacher Development (pp. 403–418). Cape Town: Juta & Company (Pty) LTD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabharwal, R., Hossain, M. R., Chugh, R., & Wells, M. (2018). Learning Management Systems in the Workplace: A Literature Review. Paper presented at the 2018 IEEE international conference on teaching, assessment, and learning for engineering (TALE).

  • Sara, B. (2014). Learning management system comparison: 15+ must have features. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 4(8), 7–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swartz, B. C., Gachago, D., & Belford, C. (2018). To care or not to care - reflections on the ethics of blended learning in times of disruption. South African Journal of Higher Education, 32. https://doi.org/10.20853/32-6-2659.

  • Van den Akker, J., de Boer, W., Folmer, E., Kuiper, W., Letschert, J., Nieveen, N., & Thijs, A. (2009). Curriculum in development: Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development. Netherlands: Spring.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Berg, C. (2018). Enriching the information systems curriculum to enable digital innovation capacity. South African Journal of Higher Education, 32(6), 215–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Manen, M. (1991). Reflectivity and the pedagogical moment: The normativity of pedagogical thinking and acting 1. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 23(6), 507–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venter, A. (2019). Social media and social capital in online learning. South African Journal of Higher Education, 33(3), 241–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waghid, F. (2018). Action research and educational technology: Cultivating disruptive learning. South African Journal of Higher Education, 32(4), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waghid, Y., & Davids, N. (2019). On the polemic of academic integrity in higher education. South African Journal of Higher Education, 33(1), 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods. New York: Sage publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeichner, K., & Liston, D. (1987). Teaching student teachers to reflect. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 23–49.

Download references

Acknowledgements

I want to thank Prof. Simon Bheki Khoza for his supervision in to construct this article from a PhD research project. Mrs. L. Gething for language editing. Furthermore, I want to thank in advance the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and valuable suggestions that will be made.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the authors on reasonable request.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Research Fund (NRF) and Fulbright scholarship within the framework of the Research and innovation, support and advancement. The NRF funding was granted to the author to complete the PhD research project in South Africa. Fulbright scholarship was granted to the author do a post- doctoral research in United States of America, Colorado state at University of Denver. These sponsors were not involved in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

I was the main author of this article and was involved in conceptualizing the article. I have read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cedric Bheki Mpungose.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

I declare that I have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mpungose, C.B. Beyond limits: Lecturers’ reflections on Moodle uptake in South African universities. Educ Inf Technol 25, 5033–5052 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10190-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10190-8

Keywords

Navigation